The Strangest Union Goal Ever: An (Indirect) Explanation

The Strangest Union Goal Ever: An (Indirect) Explanation

One of the best things about going to Union games the last three-plus years has been meeting lots of great people who DIDN'T grow up around the game.

There are plenty of people -- including my semi-regular tailgate crew (I promise to get down there early again sometime soon, guys) -- who don't wake up at 7 a.m. for EPL games and for whom Union games are simply a great way to spend a Saturday. They got dragged to a game once, not knowing the difference between an indirect kick and a penalty kick -- and have been fans ever since.

For some at PPL Park (you know who you are), these people are a nuisance, ruining their soccer snobbery with a few uneducated questions.

For me, I've found out those people are a large segment of the audience here at The Level. So, from time to time, I'll try to break down a play, moment, or trend that might seem commonplace to a soccer-head, but drew a "WTF?" from everyone else.

There's no better place to start than with the Union's second goal last week against Chivas USA. See it for yourself.

I watched this game from my couch, and immediately saw countless "What the hell?" tweets from fans. Well, here goes:

Nearly every single whistle in soccer results in a "direct" kick. It wasn't always that way (at least not from what 14-year-old me remembers from referee classes, but I digress). Handballs, dangerous tackles, push-offs, etc., all result in a "direct" kick, which simply means the kick-taker can shoot directly on goal if he so desires. You'll often see a teammate roll or touch the ball on a free kick before it's hit, but that's simply an attempt at misdirection or to gain an extra foot of space.

There are SOME fouls that result in "indirect" kicks. This simply means that someone other than the kick-taker must touch the ball before a goal can be scored (technically, the kickoff to start halves and after goals is also an indirect kick -- as is a throw-in).

There are really only two whistles you'll ever seen in a professional game that result in an indirect kick. One is for an offside violation. But since the farthest forward that kick can ever be taken is just inside midfield (you can't be offside in your own half), the ball will always touch another player anyway. So it's a moot point.

The other is what you saw Saturday.

After a ball into the box by new signing Fabinho, Chivas' Edgar Mejia seemed to stumble on the wet grass while going for the loose ball. What his intentions were, it's hard to tell. But according to the referee, he INTENTIONALLY passed the ball back to goalie Dan Kennedy. That's the key word: Intentionally.

Passing it back to your keeper is fine. But if you do it on purpose, the goalie is not allowed to use his hands. The moment Kennedy picked up the ball, the whistle blew, and everyone was confused. Usually, players are given the benefit of the doubt on backpasses, especially in a hectic and crowded penalty area. And ESPECIALLY when Noah was preparing the ark behind the River End. In my opinion, only the most blatant backpass should be whistled in those conditions.

The catch in this situation is that unlike every other foul committed inside the box, illegal touching (::giggle::) by the goalkeeper is not a penalty kick. So the ball is placed at the spot of the foul (about seven yards out, in this case), and it must be touched before going in the net (an opposing player would also count, so in theory you could blast it off the keeper's hands and in).

On any free kick, defenders must stand 10 yards away. In this case, there aren't 10 yards to give, so all Chivas players SHOULD have been on the goal line until Sebastien Le Toux touched the ball. Clearly that didn't happen, but it didn't much matter.

Once Le Toux touched the ball, it's fair game (if I remember from my reffing classes, it is supposed to roll one full rotation). And to his credit, Michael Farfan -- who I have been critical of this season -- perfectly placed a shot that is MUCH harder than he made it look.

"I think anybody who knows me or who has played with or against me along the road here, knows that I am not that kind of player," Manning said, according to a statement released by the Flyers. "I am not out there intentionally trying to hurt people. I'm a guy who plays the game hard and I take pride in that."

Gretzky didn't mind seeing that fire in McDavid, saying competitiveness is part of what makes the great ones great. And he said the targeting comes with the territory of being a superstar. It was something he and Mario Lemieux dealt with, too.

"And Connor, he's going to get tested every night, but this is not new for him," Gretzky said Friday at the NHL board of governors meetings. "He's been tested since he was a kid and then playing junior hockey and now in the NHL and he's always responded and done his part."